How do teams decide who is playing the point?

How do lower division teams, (D4, D3 etc) decide who is playing a point, particularly ones without coaches that decide? I have seen selfish players run on to the field regardless of whether they are playing well.

that's tough, especially when everyone is sharing the expense of playing - everyone feels like they need their share of points.

But, best solution is to come up with solid game plans before event and a good rotation so when things are crazy in the pit, everyone can agree that this is the rotation. BUT if someone is having an off day, they need to man up and admit they aren't getting the job done and let someone who is on fire get more points in.

If our strong five win that first point, 99% of the time, that same five take the field again with other guys HELPING their teammates get paint & air and back on field.

Assuming you have 10 players at least, we go with Line 1 and Line 2. Now obviously things can happen and that might change throughout a match but you really want to have 2 solid lines instead of 1 solid line.

We mix up our "better" players between the two lines to make it even. If a situation comes up where we are in OT and NEED the point, we tend to go with our strongest 5.

And when we chose our "strongest", the captain will ask the team as a whole who we all think are playing the best at that time, so we are all in agreement with who gets out there. Usually this will only happen a couple times so we do not have to worry about shafting some of the players out of their money.

Everything in Race To matches is situational. Make sure you practice with the lines you want to run in tournaments so everyone gets a feel for their teammates and they all get used to each other's styles.

If some things don't seem to work out at all, change it up. Never stick with what IS NOT working. Don't set anything in stone either, lots of things can happen and you might have to change some things up.

Thanks guys. Those are good suggestions. It is always a concern of playing time since everyone is sharing the expenses evenly which are not cheap. Most players are not rich and have limited disposable income unless mom and dad are funding you, so if you are not playing many points it becomes not worth their hard earned money.

Sure everyone wants to win but I think this may be a cause for many lower level teams to fall apart during the season.

Btw I am not a player, just have been around teams that I have seen issues with playing time.

Some friends and I played a couple 3 man race-to-3 local tournaments recently where you can have a 5 man roster. The first tournament, I played every point as I had the most tournament experience and in the better shape of the experienced players (this was a team decision). The second tournament I played most points, but let another teammate who we picked up for that tournament switch out with me at times (as he was in pretty good shape as well).

So really just comes down to discussing it with teammates before hand. We never had an issue with it.

There are many different ways to determine who plays each point and it can vary based on the format. For example, when my team plays xball with a 10-man roster, we have two lines of 5 and we play make it take it. We may agree on a limit to how many back to back points each line plays as well. For example, if line 2 wins, they go out and play again until they reach the limit, such as 3 back to back points. After that, line 1 comes out and plays until they lose or hit the 3 point limit.

If you do not have multiple lines, or you are not playing xball, I've heard of several different ways to do it:

1. First person to get shot sits out the next game and gets replaced by an alternate.
2. Fixed rotation - players switch out every game regardless of performance.
3. Winning combination stays on until they lose.
4. Sub out players based on game plan. Fast players in for an aggressive breakout, best gunfighters in for a defensive point, etc.
5. Badlandz rules - first five to take a knee at the dead box play. Not recommended at tournaments

Typically the best players will stay out until they cant stay out any longer.

I tend to disagree with this system a bit because it does not help the growth of your team. If you always have the starters playing and have the poopy players on the bench the poopy players will always be poopy because of the lack of experience. You can only get so good with practice, you need game day experience. When you need those poopy players to replace an exhausted starter then you get into some real trouble.

Typically the best move is to lead with the poopy players during the easier matches, then have the starters come out to save the day if they get in trouble.

Typically the best players will stay out until they cant stay out any longer.

I tend to disagree with this system a bit because it does not help the growth of your team. If you always have the starters playing and have the poopy players on the bench the poopy players will always be poopy because of the lack of experience. You can only get so good with practice, you need game day experience. When you need those poopy players to replace an exhausted starter then you get into some real trouble.

Typically the best move is to lead with the poopy players during the easier matches, then have the starters come out to save the day if they get in trouble.

This is why we run our roster make it take it with a point cap. The less experienced players are guaranteed playing time and they don't go home upset about who played the most points, because the amount of time they get on the field is in their hands every match.

Depends on what the team decides. Some of the local/regional teams play straight rotation for prelims, and they get together and decide who is playing the best. Those that they decide are, play the last rounds. Thats what I have seen near me.

that's tough, especially when everyone is sharing the expense of playing - everyone feels like they need their share of points.

But, best solution is to come up with solid game plans before event and a good rotation so when things are crazy in the pit, everyone can agree that this is the rotation. BUT if someone is having an off day, they need to man up and admit they aren't getting the job done and let someone who is on fire get more points in.

If our strong five win that first point, 99% of the time, that same five take the field again with other guys HELPING their teammates get paint & air and back on field.

Quote:

Originally Posted by eforce

There are many different ways to determine who plays each point and it can vary based on the format. For example, when my team plays xball with a 10-man roster, we have two lines of 5 and we play make it take it. We may agree on a limit to how many back to back points each line plays as well. For example, if line 2 wins, they go out and play again until they reach the limit, such as 3 back to back points. After that, line 1 comes out and plays until they lose or hit the 3 point limit.

If you do not have multiple lines, or you are not playing xball, I've heard of several different ways to do it:

1. First person to get shot sits out the next game and gets replaced by an alternate.
2. Fixed rotation - players switch out every game regardless of performance.
3. Winning combination stays on until they lose.
4. Sub out players based on game plan. Fast players in for an aggressive breakout, best gunfighters in for a defensive point, etc.
5. Badlandz rules - first five to take a knee at the dead box play. Not recommended at tournaments

We start with a fixed starting line for the event (generally based on who played the layout the strongest in practice). We will then rotate out those that aren't playing their best.
I have used Winning combo stays out, because sometimes you just can't beat the dynamic that shows up that day.
As has been said before it all depends on the game situation. In our organization we have a captain (me) and assistant captain. One of those two decides who is playing based on best performance, and both of the people in that role are trusted to make the best judgement and it does sometimes lead to one of them sitting if they aren't performing or someone else is getting it done better.